Andrew Shadura wrote: > Honestly, I’d like to object to packaging a 31 line script in a separate > package.
These are distinct packages, with distinct version numbers, and packages will need to declare (potentially versioned) dependencies on them. Packaging numerous libraries in a single source package has downsides as well, such as larger uploads any time *any* component of the package changes, or any time a new component gets added. I would, in general, object to packages like this *if they're not being packaged as part of the dependency/build-dependency tree of some other intended package*, but in general, I think we need to be prepared to deal with upstreams that have small single-purpose packages. I don't think we should package the entire node ecosystem, but packaging the subset of it needed for end-user-targeted packages seems fine. Also, consider the ongoing issue of packaging high-level JavaScript libraries and frameworks correctly, whose build-dependency toolchains for processes like minimization/"browserification" have numerous packages like these in them. If we're going to require the packaging of all the tools needed to build such libraries, which I absolutely think we should, then let's not simultaneously put up roadblocks every time someone tries to do so.
